Windows 8: Such a disappointment

I have used W8 a few minutes - I'm mostly iOS (oddly enough, I'm struggling to find correct, fact-based walkthroughs online).Most comments here remind me so much of OS X 10.0. Aqua was at least as dividing as Metro.

I thought I'd chime in because I find it's a real positive sign. I get how many habits/features can get broken on the short term, though W8 seems to present a strong, constructive personality. That's the 1st time I'm curious about Windows in my whole life. It has obviously nothing to do with Vista, a flawed development ruined by even worse marketing.

Now is it 10 years to late for a bold turn over, with a conservative user base and most PCs actually lacking hardware to tell the same "revolution" story?

OS X and Aqua would not have become popular without distinctive, 1st class hardware features (notably glass trackpad and Air). Keeping the same PC form factor, not bringing any major benefit on hardware side, makes it more apparent that features/habits are lost on software side.

OS X and Aqua would not have become popular without distinctive, 1st class hardware features (notably glass trackpad and Air). Keeping the same PC form factor, not bringing any major benefit on hardware side, makes it more apparent that features/habits are lost on software side.

As a few people have already mention, Metro works fine as a tablet UI, not a desktop one. I doupt anyone will be ditching their laptops/desktops anytime soon for a tablet. Microsoft screwed up with Metro.

OS X and Aqua would not have become popular without distinctive, 1st class hardware features (notably glass trackpad and Air). Keeping the same PC form factor, not bringing any major benefit on hardware side, makes it more apparent that features/habits are lost on software side.

As a few people have already mention, Metro works fine as a tablet UI, not a desktop one. I doupt anyone will be ditching their laptops/desktops anytime soon for a tablet. Microsoft screwed up with Metro.

Opinions vary on that one. I have several Macs in my house (I do Windows programming for a living, so I use Windows all day at work). I had no plans on ever owning a Windows machine again until 8. 8 marks the beginning of a large change, like it or not. Apple tried it with that gesture pad, saying stuff about gorilla arms, but in the end, they'll be going touch screen as well.

ahmerali's argument is a non-starter, as a developer does have the choice. To be fair, given the ranting and raving of some, perhaps Microsoft *did* disable the desktop...

Ge0ph et al - your opinions are not objective or concrete. Phrasing them as such is a bit over the top. I've been using Windows 8 on my work laptop (touchpad) and desktop (mouse and two large monitors) without issue. Ars wrote a few articles that actually touch on the real issues. Strangely, these rarely come up on the forums.

I'm just saying, if it were so good Microsoft wouldn't have to force it on us. Programers would naturally want to write Metro apps.

I've been running W8 since it was released via action pack, back in late September.It's a refreshing and welcome design change. To be a bit more descriptive, it fucking rocks. I can't believe people actually need a program (paid even!) to avoid metro. lol. It takes all of 1ms to get to the desktop.

I've been running W8 since it was released via action pack, back in late September.It's a refreshing and welcome design change. To be a bit more descriptive, it fucking rocks. I can't believe people actually need a program (paid even!) to avoid metro. lol. It takes all of 1ms to get to the desktop.

Annnnd you have to do it every fucking time. Plus, there's no start button, plus search isn't global, plus you have to go to a hot corner and click "Settings" then power to turn the thing off.

As other have said, I'm sure Metro is the bees fucking knees on a touch enabled device. My desktop is not one of those devices. I want to log in, have it go to my desktop and be able to do what I need to do. This is the same reason I installed Gnome Classic to get rid of the abortion that is Unity. Paradigm changes on the desktop are necessary from time to time, but Metro isn't for the better. It's a nasty fucking kludge to try and bridge platforms, where none is really needed. It's a forced solution on desktop users looking for a problem.

As I mentioned on another thread W8 is not a step forward, but a lateral one. Good thing is that W7 will be here for a long time coming and thensome. Perhaps by the time MS releases W9 it'll come to its senses and avoid these hybrids, mongrel OSs for good. W8 is good for tablets, so market it to that segment. Do not try to make it also be a desktop OS, because then it lessens the effectiveness of the desktop and puts an unnecessary onus on the tablet.

Paradigm changes on the desktop are necessary from time to time, but Metro isn't for the better. It's a nasty fucking kludge to try and bridge platforms, where none is really needed. It's a forced solution on desktop users looking for a problem.

AMEN!!! Maybe we should send a petition to Microsoft to remove or allow us to disable Metro on PCs. Or better yet, boycot Microsoft and move to Linux or one of the BSDs...

Why would you want to run IE as administrator? Anyhow, just turn off UAC if you don't want security prompts, but they're there for a good reason.

So I can install a new SSL certificate. At least that's the easy way to do it. And the problem isn't "Why do I want to do this?" it's "Why doesn't it run as Administrator?"

You can't be seriously asking this question, because the answer to that would be "Because software developers are no longer complete retards when it comes to security". Not only is it not running as Administrator, it's running as a sandboxed application.

^^^ This is why I discontinued contributing (in a helpful way) to this thread. Kudos to you Jago.

There is no point trying to help someone that isn't listening (or quite possibly not understanding) the help I've given on SSL and then compounding the problem by rudely refusing to provide additional information about their motives for wanting to adjust the native screen res in the Start Screen. There's no practical reason to change the native resolution on a monitor outside of some ultra niche use that likely has a more functional workaround. Isn't its funny how you can't change the native screen resolution (without some sort of hack) on your iPad either, does that make iOS a disappointment? Even more coincidentally, you can change it in OSX! And Windows 8 represents both of these scenarios in one OS.... I'm pretty sure android is in the same bag here - being stuck in the tablets native res. So why don't you update your thread to "TABLET OS's - Such a disappointment". Hopefully someone will realise what insight you've provided here and save us all from encountering these problems in the future.

I'm loving windows 8. Its a faster, more efficient windows 7, and that can not be denied. Its a fact.

The people who do not like windows 8, are not basing their opinion on performance, they are basing it on superficial things like the start menu being slightly different.

The funny part to me is that everyone complains about the lack of a start menu, but no one praises the awesome inclusion of the new advanced menu (right click the bottom left corner). This alone is better than the entire start menu in windows 7.

The start menu in windows 7 was redundant. Pin your programs to the task bar, and you wont even have to use a start menu.

Windows 8 is a better windows 7. Will the apps improve? I hope so. The app store is a mess, its ugly, poorly designed etc. But the OS itself is fast, efficient and better than 7. That is a fact.

OK...here's an update on my e-mail issue. I was able to test using the non-secure IMAP port (TCP/143). Using this port I was able to connect and use the Metro Mail application without further issue (though I am curious why I had to log on with my Microsoft account before it would let me configure an IMAP server). I then attempted to use the secure IMAP port (TCP/993). I once again received a message to the effect I need to install an SSL certificate (I suspect because I'm using a self signed certificate) and to contact my system administrator (of which I'm it). It's likely once I install the SSL certificate I will be able to use Metro Mail (not that I really want to, just learning how to use it).

The people who do not like windows 8, are not basing their opinion on performance, they are basing it on superficial things like the start menu being slightly different.

The interface is not "superficial", and the start menu isn't "slightly different" - it's gone.

Quote:

The funny part to me is that everyone complains about the lack of a start menu, but no one praises the awesome inclusion of the new advanced menu (right click the bottom left corner). This alone is better than the entire start menu in windows 7.

It's not remotely like the Start Menu. It's a list of shortcuts because MS realize the Start Screen is a pathetic replacement, so they slapped that hack in.

Quote:

The start menu in windows 7 was redundant. Pin your programs to the task bar, and you wont even have to use a start menu.

(though I am curious why I had to log on with my Microsoft account before it would let me configure an IMAP server).

Maybe you have to log in to the Microsoft mother ship before doing anything else in order for them to enable the push notification service that allows the Mail app to display on your Start Screen that you've got messages waiting?

I've been running Windows 8 on my D620 for about two months. It's not a disappointment on the whole, though I'd be loath to install it on the system of a less sophisticated user. A few impressions:

* Boot and resume times are massively improved. Under 15 seconds from a clean boot to desktop on this circa-2006 laptop. Resume from Standby is essentially instant. This feature alone has made my laptop much more usable.

* ... except that there's a glitch with Resume. The system beats on the Intel G2 SSD for over a minute, all the while very slow to load anything. This sluggishenss never dissipates. I don't know what's going on, but I've found it preferable to shut the system down for now.

* The Metro Start menu is mostly irrelevant. I search for things by text string and mash Enter. Doesn't matter if the menu uses the whole screen. What does matter is that the Search box has been split into multiple categories. It's no longer an omnibox; if you want a Control Panel item, you need to click a different search category. That's slow and it sucks.

* Keyboard shortcuts (e.g., Win-X) make the system much more usable for quick navigation.

* The Charms bar on the right is a pain in the ass. It's slow and vague and a poor way to reach any configuration options.

* The new Task Manager is awesome.

* The Metro apps are a waste of time on a desktop machine. No thanks. If I wanted an unconfigurable fullscreen UI, I'd get an iPad.

Otherwise, it's basically Windows 7. What I really want (resolution independence) isn't there. But in general performance, it's a worthwhile upgrade if you're capable of navigating what feels initially like a handicapped interface.

I'm just saying, if it were so good Microsoft wouldn't have to force it on us. Programers would naturally want to write Metro apps.

Oh they will, for tablets...

I have strong doubts about that.

Look at it in a different way: who would want to invest time and money in writing an application that has the following restrictions:

- 30% of any sales goes to a third-party just for the distribution rights.- Cannot be tested outside a very limited scope.- Must be submit for validation but only when it is finished (so you've already paid the full price of development).- Can be arbitrarily refused (and effectively destroyed as a product) for things like: change in authorized APIs, changes in TOS, because MS decides that my product competes with theirs (or something they have in production) or simply that the market segment is full already.

The answer to that is: anyone who develop a product that has a value close to 0 or who has enough muscle to weight on MS.

Now, add the fact that the user is one click away from the desktop , where none of these rules apply, and I don't see many independent developer running to that platform. Personally, I'd much rather provide a touch-friendly interface for my apps that runs under the desktop.

I rarely hit the Start menu with the mouse. It's almost always Windows key, type name of app, hit enter. That didn't really change in the time I spent with Windows 8.

So you didn't use the Start Menu either apparently.

No, it's quite inefficient, except as a index for a quick search. For most of the programs I use, I don't even have to look at it if I use the keyboard. For example, Windows key, "Remote", <enter> will get me the RDP client every time without looking. (It may seem odd to say that I'm not looking at it, but I use multiple monitors and that thing is in the far bottom left corner)

Look at it in a different way: who would want to invest time and money in writing an application that has the following restrictions:

- 30% of any sales goes to a third-party just for the distribution rights.- Cannot be tested outside a very limited scope.- Must be submit for validation but only when it is finished (so you've already paid the full price of development).- Can be arbitrarily refused (and effectively destroyed as a product) for things like: change in authorized APIs, changes in TOS, because MS decides that my product competes with theirs (or something they have in production) or simply that the market segment is full already.

Look at it in a different way: who would want to invest time and money in writing an application that has the following restrictions:

- 30% of any sales goes to a third-party just for the distribution rights.- Cannot be tested outside a very limited scope.- Must be submit for validation but only when it is finished (so you've already paid the full price of development).- Can be arbitrarily refused (and effectively destroyed as a product) for things like: change in authorized APIs, changes in TOS, because MS decides that my product competes with theirs (or something they have in production) or simply that the market segment is full already.

You must be kidding. Tell me that you are.

Or he hasn't been paying attention to what's been going on with the most popular platforms these days.

Look at it in a different way: who would want to invest time and money in writing an application that has the following restrictions:

- 30% of any sales goes to a third-party just for the distribution rights.- Cannot be tested outside a very limited scope.- Must be submit for validation but only when it is finished (so you've already paid the full price of development).- Can be arbitrarily refused (and effectively destroyed as a product) for things like: change in authorized APIs, changes in TOS, because MS decides that my product competes with theirs (or something they have in production) or simply that the market segment is full already.

All the mobile developers come to mind (iOS, Android, MS), followed by most of the console developers and after that software developers who want to maximize their exposure. So I'd say that there are enough people out there who are going to do that.

Desktop has been pretty good. Metro, not so much. Very disappointed with it. At least the build in applications.

My general impression is that the built in applications with any version of Windows have always been the absolute minimum in functionality and features so that Microsoft could say 'yeah, it has that' on the marketing materials.

Basically if you want to actually use email in any meaningful way, a full featured client like Thunderbird or Outlook is necessary. The built in Mail app is a real bare bones implementation. It's the same as anything else in Windows, the included stuff is the minimum you need to get most things done but if you want a really well done tool for every day use you need something purpose designed for that.

Personally, all I wanted from Windows 8 was the technical upgrades like SMB3, improved performance and driver handling, a more refined interface (improvements in the file copy dialog, etc.), and all that. The metro interface stuff should be a standalone add-on for touch enabled systems, something like a Windows 8 Touch Pack or similar. If nothing else, the start screen should have an option to just be a cut down version for non-touch enabled systems that is a sort of half way between the windows 7 start menu and the windows 8 thing.

Don't get me wrong, I love the simplified design aesthetic of the metro look (my work machine is windows 7 with a very metro like interface theme). I would have been fine with basically improving windows 7 on a technical basis, fixing a bunch of stuff and revamping the default theme to look more metro-like (especially if they finally took a real dig through and fixed up and standardized all the UI elements that are still using windows 3/98/XP icons and features).

I applaud the desire to refine, improve and evolve the UI in windows, but windows 8 feels too much like a half baked idea taken about 30% of the way through a full production release. The dichotomy between 'metro' stuff (charms, hidden settings interfaces, gestures being the only way to get to some stuff) and the remaining 70% of the 'old' windows interface is just too great to ignore, especially when it is most grating and obvious to 'power users' who are the people who are usually the biggest factor in making decisions on what to implement in the work IT environment and therefor extend that influence to home use.

I think depending on how much MS pushes Windows 8 and how intractable they are on either 'finishing' the metro interface or backtracking to the 'classic' design, they may have opened up a gaping hole for a spike in linux desktop use for the mainstream. Not that I think linux releases will step up and take advantage, but it is suddenly a lot more possible. There remain a number of gaping issues for linux adoption in mainstream desktop use (AD integration and SMB implementation, consistency and predictability across releases, reliability and ease of updates and deployment for home and novice users, etc.), but if linux developers were to concentrate all their fire on those things instead of redesigning wobbly windows again, or developing yet another package manager, or a 203rd ruby environment manager, they could make a pretty serious inroad to replacing windows as the de facto desktop operating system.

Well said, my sentiments exactly!I applaud Microsoft for their effort, but they should have made a better job at separating Touch from Desktop, imho..those little refinements in the classic Desktop UI (file-copy dialog, Task manager, HyperV) would have been reason enough for me to upgrade to Win8..but Metro is really holding back my enthusiasm for just going ahead and taking the plunge...Win7 is still a fine OS...I'm curious if MS will change things around sometime later...

Have you reported this bug in the Microsoft forums? There might be a fix already.

Nothing is bug-free. You've run into a particular bug in the Metro Mail client where it won't allow you to use private certs for SSL-encrypted POP3. I run into bugs related to private certs all the damn time.

Complaining that this tiny bug makes Windows 8 "useless" is silly. I think the old Mail app in Windows 7 had lots of bugs too.

I rarely hit the Start menu with the mouse. It's almost always Windows key, type name of app, hit enter. That didn't really change in the time I spent with Windows 8.

So you didn't use the Start Menu either apparently.

I used to use the Start Menu a lot, back in Windows 95.

As time went on, the Start Menu grew more and more useless. I like how people are complaining that the Start Menu is great for "lots of programs". No, it isn't. That's exactly the scenario where it falls down.

By default, most application installers just dump their folder on the Start Menu top level, so, by default, if you install a lot of programs you have a massive scrolling list of randomly-organized, randomly-named (some are vendor/app some are just app) folders that is near-impossible to sift through. And don't bring up searching, Windows 8 kept that.

The only alternative is to manually open the Start Menu in Windows Explorer and edit all the entries by hand to create a sane folder structure and names. As far as I can tell, literally nobody but me regularly does this. It's a lot of work.

In practice, I launch applications either from icons on the desktop or from icons pinned to the Task Bar 99% of the time and that's the case with almost all Windows users.

The only alternative is to manually open the Start Menu in Windows Explorer and edit all the entries by hand to create a sane folder structure and names. As far as I can tell, literally nobody but me regularly does this. It's a lot of work.

That's what I do with everything that needs to respond to my organizational preferences and skills (music dirs, gfx dirs, etc). I don't think it's that difficult at all, and moreso considering this is a computer's enthusiasts site.

Quote:

In practice, I launch applications either from icons on the desktop or from icons pinned to the Task Bar 99% of the time and that's the case with almost all Windows users

I like my desktop empty. IMO desktops filled with icons are unbearable. Same thing goes for the talk bar icon placing option. I mostly use keyboard shortcuts to launch most used apps or go W key and type just 2 or 3 letters of the app I want and hit enter. Couldn't be easier.

Just to expound and clarify my previous statement. I don't consider W8 a disappointment. I never expected it to be much better than what it is. I have no real use for this OS at this time, that's how I can best descrive my position vis a vis W8. I am neither enthused nor disappointed about it. I will keep using W7 Pro x64 as it suits my needs better than W8 at this point.

However, my point stands as I see it: this is a site where people who like to hack their systems to better reflct their needs come to meet likeminded people, so a little reorganizing, a tad of UI config and performance seeking hacks are common fare since Ars' inception. As a remnant to the W98 days some users still look for tweaks to enhance their OSs' performance. I've given up on most of those hacks simply because I don't really consider them necessary anymore.

I like my desktop empty. IMO desktops filled with icons are unbearable. Same thing goes for the talk bar icon placing option. I mostly use keyboard shortcuts to launch most used apps or go W key and type just 2 or 3 letters of the app I want and hit enter. Couldn't be easier.

I too like my desktop uncluttered. However, I don't consider my task bar to be part of the desktop. I pin my most used apps to the task bar because they appear there anyhow when I'm working and using them, and because I simply love the "jump list" functionality that Windows 7 brought to the table. For me at least right clicking an icon and choosing from the list of most recent things I worked on is easier than hitting the Windows key, typing a few letters, choosing the program I want and then from within that program opening which ever file I want to start working on again. You might want to try it some time, and if you want to keep your icon studded task bar out of sight, go into the task bar's properties and set it to Auto-hide.

That's what I do with everything that needs to respond to my organizational preferences and skills (music dirs, gfx dirs, etc). I don't think it's that difficult at all, and moreso considering this is a computer's enthusiasts site.

Okay, so two people. And the fact that very few people do this (nobody within Microsoft that I've met does) should give you a hint that it's a lot of work to have to rename and reorganize the entries in the Start Menu every time you install an app.

Quote:

I like my desktop empty. IMO desktops filled with icons are unbearable. Same thing goes for the talk bar icon placing option. I mostly use keyboard shortcuts to launch most used apps or go W key and type just 2 or 3 letters of the app I want and hit enter. Couldn't be easier.

Why do you need the Start Menu if you use the search to find programs? They kept search in Windows 8.

Custom keyboard shortcuts are also a lot of work (Microsoft employees DO use this extensively). But this functionality has been preserved in Windows 8 (I think). I'm pretty sure you can launch a tile with a keyboard shortcut.

I realize that you use Windows this way, but less than 1% of users do. It's unreasonable to ask Microsoft to design for your edge case. And as sophisticated user, you don't have to put up with it. You can install StartX or other 3rd-party utilities in Windows 8 to get much of what you want. Just like users that preferred OSX's dock could install a 3rd-party dock on Windows 7.

All the mobile developers come to mind (iOS, Android, MS), followed by most of the console developers and after that software developers who want to maximize their exposure. So I'd say that there are enough people out there who are going to do that.

I didn't say nobody would do that, I said that you'd only get programs in there that either have no (or low) value, that have their value in some other component (clients for other applications, etc) or that are made by companies that can have some kind of sweet deal with MS (or at least, talk to them: I know for experience than trying to talk to MS through the regular channels when you're not a large dev team with thousands of seats is an exercise of frustration, no matter how nice MS employees can be on their forums).

BTW, I didn't exactly come up with these reasons on my own: it was the result of long discussions I had with several small ISVs and independent (local) developers: trying to release a Metro^H^H^Hmodern UI app for the app store just isn't worth the risk for them.

Why do you need the Start Menu if you use the search to find programs? They kept search in Windows 8.

I'd like to say that the new search in windows 8 is, for my use, vastly inferior to the one in 7. The main reason for this is that it doesn't present all the results in a nice list (so I can type "windows update" in search and press enter) but uses several tabs for that.

I suppose it might be a matter of personal preferences (because some people might not want to be bothered by what is under the "settings" tab) and possibly not too important, but this highlight what I think of the new UI: it's not unusable, but it seems to be specially designed to be extremely frustrating to use (don't get me started on the new "right-click" paradigm either).

For now, I can work my way around these frustrations using the command-line or Start8. I don't think it's a satisfactory situation, however, and I would really love for MS to address these issues not for the possible tablet users of tomorrow, but for the millions of current users of Windows (even more so that they did excellent work with the backend and the server).